EPIC Alert 20.15

=======================================================================
E P I C A l e r t
=======================================================================
Volume 20.15 July 30, 2013
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Published by the
Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)
Washington, D.C.
http://www.epic.org/alert/epic_alert_20.15.html
"Defend Privacy. Support EPIC."
http://epic.org/donate
========================================================================
Table of Contents
========================================================================
[1] EPIC Defends Student Privacy Rights in Federal Court
[2] FISA Court Renews, DOJ Defends, Unlawful Surveillance Program
[3] NJ High Court Issues Landmark Location Privacy Decision
[4] EPIC Urges Oversight Board to Uphold Strong Open Government Rules
[5] EPIC Asks FTC To Investigate 'Magna Carta' App
[6] News in Brief
[7] EPIC in the News
[8] EPIC Book Review: 'Spying on Democracy'
[9] Upcoming Conferences and Events
TAKE ACTION: Sign EPIC's Petition Against NSA Domestic Surveillance!
- SIGN the Petition: https://epic.org/NSApetition/
- LEARN More: https://epic.org/privacy/terrorism/fisa/
- SUPPORT EPIC: http://www.epic.org/donate/
========================================================================
[1] EPIC Defends Student Privacy Rights in Federal Court
========================================================================
EPIC argued July 24 before a Washington, DC, federal district court in
support of student privacy rights. EPIC's President Marc Rotenberg and
Administrative Law Counsel Khaliah Barnes contended that recent
proposals by the Department of Education would undercut student privacy
rights and are in violation of federal law.
In the case EPIC v. Dept. of Education, EPIC is challenging the US
Education Department's 2011 changes to the Family Educational Rights
and Privacy Act (FERPA), which sets out rules requiring educational
institutions to limit unnecessary disclosures of confidential student
information. The Education Department's changes allow the release of
student records for non-academic purposes and undercut parental consent
provisions.
In 2011, EPIC submitted extensive comments to the agency, opposing the
changes on the grounds that the Education Department had proposed
"recommendations that would undermine privacy safeguards set out in the
statute and would unnecessarily expose students to new privacy risks."
After the Education Department failed to modify the proposed regulations
EPIC filed suit in early 2012, arguing that the changes exceeded the
agency's authority, and that the revised regulations were not in
accordance with the 1974 Privacy Act. "Through the FERPA's text,
purpose, and legislative history, Congress unambigiously guaranteed
students the right to prevent disclosure of directory information,"
EPIC stated.
EPIC is joined in the lawsuit by EPIC Board of Directors members
Grayson Barber, Pablo Garcia Molina, Peter Neumann, and Deborah Peel.
EPIC: EPIC v. Dep't of Education
http://epic.org/apa/ferpa/
US Dept. of Education: FERPA Final Regulations (Dec. 2, 2011)
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-12-02/pdf/2011-30683.pdf
EPIC: Complaint re: Proposed Ed. Dept. Regulations (Feb. 29, 2012)
http://epic.org/privacy/student/EPIC_FERPA_Comments.pdf
EPIC: Student Privacy
http://epic.org/privacy/student/
EPIC: The Administrative Procedure Act
http://epic.org/open_gov/Administrative-Procedure-Act.html
========================================================================
[2] FISA Court Renews, DOJ Defends, Unlawful Surveillance Program
========================================================================
The Director of National Intelligence has "filed an application with
the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court seeking renewal of the
authority to collect telephony metadata in bulk, and that the Court
renewed that authority." This order from the FISA Court will allow the
NSA to continue collecting records of all telephone calls in the US,
including purely domestic communications.
In a separate filing, the US Department of Justice announced July 18
that a New York federal district court could not overturn the FISA
court's order.
The DOJ further asserted, in a July 16 letter to Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner
(R-WI), that "because the telephony metadata must be available in bulk
to allow the NSA to identify records of terrorist communications, there
are 'reasonable grounds to believe' that the data is relevant to an
authorized investigation." The USA PATRIOT Act requires that business
records be "relevant" to an investigation and does not allow the
federal government to acquire them without cause.
EPIC has filed a petition with the US Supreme Court challenging the
lawfulness of the NSA domestic surveillance program. EPIC argues that
the FISA court did not have legal authority to compel telephone company
Verizon to turn over the telephone records of every customer. According
to EPIC's petition, the FISA Court "exceeded its statutory jurisdiction
when it ordered production of millions of domestic telephone records t
hat cannot plausibly be relevant to an authorized investigation."
ODNI: Renewal of NSA Authorization (Jul. 19, 2013)
http://epic.org/redirect/072613-ODNI-reauth.html
Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI): Letter from US DOJ (Jul. 16, 2013)
http://epic.org/redirect/072613-sensenbrenner.html
EPIC: Petition to the Supreme Court re: Verizon Order (Jul. 8, 2013)
http://epic.org/EPIC-FISC-Mandamus-Petition.pdf
EPIC: In re EPIC
http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/in-re-epic/
========================================================================
[3] NJ High Court Issues Landmark Location Privacy Decision
========================================================================
The Supreme Court of New Jersey held July 18 that individuals have a
reasonable expectation of privacy in their cell phone location data
under the New Jersey state constitution. This is the first state
supreme-court decision to establish a constitutional right to privacy
in location records.
In State v. Earls, the New Jersey high court found that "cell-phone
location information, which users must provide to receive service, can
reveal a great deal of personal information about an individual."
Consequently, law enforcement officers in New Jersey will be required
to obtain a search warrant to track an individual's location.
In order to communicate with the telephone network, a cell phone must
be in constant contact with nearby cell towers. These connections
create a "paper trail" of an individual's phone records. By examining
the location of towers to which a phone is connected over a period of
time, law enforcement can track a person's movements in great detail.
In urban areas where cell phone towers are densely packed, a person's
location can be pinpointed very precisely; tracking the phone is
equivalent to tracking the person.
The decision in State v. Earls is the first state supreme-court case
upholding location privacy since the US Supreme Court's 2012 decision
in US v. Jones, a GPS tracking case. The state of Montana has passed a
similar statute requiring warrants to track cell phone location.
EPIC submitted a "friend of the court" brief in State v. Earls. After
filing briefs in support of a warrant requirement, EPIC Appellate
Advocacy Counsel Alan Butler gave oral argument detailing how cell
phone location tracking technology works in practice. The New Jersey
Supreme Court's decision notes that "EPIC offered helpful details about
the current state of cell-phone technology."
New Jersey Supreme Court: Opinion in State v. Earls (Jul. 18, 2013)
http://epic.org/redirect/072613-nj-earls-decision.html
EPIC: State v. Earls
http://epic.org/amicus/location/earls/
EPIC: United States v. Jones
http://epic.org/amicus/jones/
State of Montana: House Bill 603 (Apr. 22, 2013)
http://leg.mt.gov/bills/2013/billhtml/HB0603.htm
EPIC: Locational Privacy
http://epic.org/privacy/location_privacy
========================================================================
[4] EPIC Urges Oversight Board to Uphold Strong Open Government Rules
========================================================================
In recent extensive comments to the President's Privacy and Civil
Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB), EPIC urged the Board not to weaken
the Freedom of Information and Sunshine Acts as proposed.
PCLOB is an independent agency created to analyze and review the
privacy and civil liberties impacts of executive branch
counterterrorism efforts. The Board was established in by the
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, at the
recommendation of the 9/11 Commission, and is comprised of five members
appointed by the President and confirmed by the US Senate.
EPIC's comments assert, "Because PCLOB is a watchdog agency for
government information practices," the Board's "open government
regulations must increase transparency concerning government activity
affecting privacy and civil liberties. The agency must make records
that it maintains freely available to ensure that PCLOB and other
agencies uphold individual privacy rights. Moreover, the agency must
improve upon its past practices and become a leader in holding public
discussions on topical government privacy issues." According to EPIC,
the Board has proposed to adopt vague, broad, and otherwise unlawful
definitions permitting the oversight agency to withhold information
and delay document production. The proposed regulations also would
allow the Board to encourage other agencies to classify information,
and to terminate public participation in Board meetings "at any time
for any reason."
EPIC's comments allege that PCLOB's proposed regulations are unlawful,
outside the scope of the Board's mandate, and that many of the proposed
changes "directly contravene" the President's and Attorney General's
statements on the importance of "the transparency of the federal
government." EPIC recommends that the Board "revise the proposed
regulations, remove the new barriers to access to government
information, and incorporate new procedures that ease, not burden, the
public's efforts to learn about the activities of its government. As
currently written," EPIC concludes, "several of PCLOB's proposed
revisions are contrary to the Freedom of Information Act and Sunshine
Act, exceed the scope of the agency's rulemaking authority, and should
be revised as indicated."
EPIC: Comments to PCLOB on FOIA (Jul. 15, 2013)
http://epic.org/open_gov/EPIC-PCLOB-FOIA.pdf
Federal Register: Proposed Rule Changes for FOIA (May 15, 2013)
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-05-15/pdf/2013-11333.pdf
EPIC: The Privacy Act of 1974
http://epic.org/privacy/1974act/
EPIC: The 9/11 Commission Report
http://epic.org/privacy/terrorism/911comm.html
EPIC: Open Government
http://epic.org/open_gov/
========================================================================
[5] EPIC Asks FTC To Investigate 'Magna Carta' App
========================================================================
EPIC has filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission against
Samsung, the publisher of a mobile app for rapper Jay-Z's new album
"Magna Carta Holy Grail." According to EPIC's complaint, The "Magna
Carta" app "collected massive amounts of personal information from
users and required substantial user permissions."
Additionally, states EPIC, "Samsung failed to disclose material
information about the privacy practices of the App, collected data
unnecessary to the functioning of the Magna Carta App, deprived users
of meaningful choice regarding the collection of their data, interfered
with device functionality, and failed to implement reasonable data
minimization procedures." These practices, according to EPIC, "violate
Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act and are actionable by the
Commission."
Specifically, the "Magna Carta" app collects user personal information,
including:
"a. Approximate user location using cell site locations and Wi-Fi
networks
b. Precise user location using precise location using the Global
Positioning System (GPS), cell site locations, and Wi-Fi
networks
c. Mobile device identifiers, including the International Mobile
Subscriber Identity and International Mobile Station Equipment
Identity numbers, both of which are unique identifiers
d. Time periods during which the phone is active
e. Telephone numbers dialed
f. The identity of other applications installed on the device."
According to EPIC's complaint, the app can run in the background when
users switch to other apps on their mobile devices; can continue to
connect to the Internet while running; signs in as soon as users'
phones are switched on, and has access to the phones' vibration and
"sleep" functions. "The number of permissions requested" by the app,
EPIC states, "verges on parody."
EPIC's complaint further alleges that the "Magna Carta" app includes
hidden spam techniques that force users to promote the album. The app
requires users to log in to their Facebook or Twitter accounts in order
to access any of the content: "In the run-up to the album's release,"
EPIC contends, "the Magna Carta App allowed users to view song lyrics,
but only if the user posted a tweet or Facebook status update promoting
the fact that they had unlocked each lyric."
EPIC has asked the Commission to investigate Samsung and enjoin the
company's unfair and "deceptive data collection practices for any
future apps that it may offer." Specifically, EPIC has requested that
the Commission:
"a. Disgorge and delete the user data that was improperly obtained
from those users who previously installed the Magna Carta App;
b. Compel Samsung to comply with all of the requirements of the
Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights for the Magna Carta App and all
similar products and services;
c. Compel Samsung to restrict its data collection to the user data
necessary to run the app; and
d. Provide such other relief as the Commission finds necessary and
appropriate."
Earlier in 2013, EPIC filed a complaint with the FTC against Snapchat,
the publisher of a mobile app that claimed to delete photos and videos
"forever." In fact, the photos and videos collected by Snapchat remained
on users' phones following their purported EPIC's Snapchat complaint
reminded the Commission to endorse "reasonable collection limits" and
"sound retention practices."
EPIC: Complaint to FTC re: "Magna Carta" App (Jul. 12, 2013)
http://epic.org/ftc/EPICsamsungcomplaintFINAL.pdf
EPIC: Jay-Z Magna Carta App
http://epic.org/samsung_jay-z_magna_carta_app.html
EPIC: Complaint to FTC re: Snapchat, May 16, 2013
http://epic.org/privacy/ftc/EPIC-Snapchat-Complaint.pdf
EPIC: FTC
http://epic.org/privacy/internet/ftc/
========================================================================
[6] News in Brief
========================================================================
House Narrowly Defeats Bill to End NSA Domestic Surveillance Program
In a close vote, the US House of Representatives voted 217 to 205 to
reauthorize funding for the controversial NSA domestic surveillance
program that has resulted in the collection of all American telephone
customers' call records. The outcome followed intense lobbying by the
Obama Administration and leaders of the intelligence community. The
measure was introduced by Reps. Justin Amash (R-MI) and John Conyers
(D-MI). EPIC has filed a petition with the US Supreme Court, charging
that the program violates section 215 of the Patriot Act. A decision
by the Court is expected in early October.
US House: Roll Call Vote on NSA Surveillance Program (Jul. 24, 2013)
http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2013/roll412.xml
IC Officials: Letter in Support of NSA Program (Jul. 23, 2013)
http://epic.org/redirect/072613-IC-NSA-letter.html
Rep. Justin Amash (R-MI): Fact Sheet on NSA Amendment (Jul. 24, 2013)
http://amash.house.gov/speech/amash-nsa-amendment-fact-sheet
EPIC: In re EPIC - NSA Telephone Records Surveillance
http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/in-re-epic/default.html
EPIC Updates Congress on Organization's Response to NSA Surveillance
EPIC has sent a letter to the US House Judiciary Committee detailing
EPIC's response to the NSA domestic surveillance program. "In our view,
the secret court simply lacks the legal authority to authorize this
program of domestic surveillance," EPIC writes. EPIC has filed a
petition with the US Supreme Court challenging the Verizon Order
issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. EPIC is also
petitioning the NSA to create public rules governing the agency's
surveillance authorities.
EPIC: Letter to US House re: NSA Surveillance Program (Jul. 15, 2013)
http://epic.org/EPIC-Letter-to-House-Judiciary.pdf
EPIC: Petition to US Supreme Court re: Verizon Order (Jul. 8, 2013)
http://epic.org/EPIC-FISC-Mandamus-Petition.pdf
EPIC: NSA Verizon Order (Apr. 25, 2013)
http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/Section-215-Order-to-Verizon.pdf
EPIC: Petition to NSA re: Domestic Surveillance
http://epic.org/NSApetition/
EPIC: In re EPIC - NSA Telephone Records Surveillance
http://epic.org/privacy/nsa/in-re-epic/default.html
Justice Department Revises Rules on Obtaining Journalists' Records
The US Department of Justice has issued a report outlining the
department's revised rules for obtaining journalists' records. The
policy change comes in the wake of controversies over the Department's
subpoena of Associated Press calling records. The new rules establish
a presumption that reporters will be notified when their records are
sought, and raises the legal standard for access under the Privacy
Protection Act of 1980, a law intended to protect journalists' records
from government access. Following the AP controversy, EPIC filed a
Freedom of Information Act request seeking the legal basis for the
Justice Department's subpoena of reporters' phone records.
US DoJ: 'Report on Review of News Media Policies' (Jul. 12, 2013)
http://www.justice.gov/iso/opa/resources/2202013712162851796893.pdf
US House: Hearing with AG Eric Holder re: AP Records (May 14, 2013)
http://judiciary.house.gov/news/2013/05142013.html
EPIC: FOIA Request to USDoJ re: Reporter Surveillance (May 14, 2013)
http://epic.org/redirect/072613-EPIC-DOJ-FOIA.html
EPIC: The Privacy Protection Act of 1980
http://epic.org/privacy/ppa/
EPIC: Free Flow of Information Act
http://epic.org/free_speech/free_flow_of_information_act.html
Web Working Group Rejects Industry 'Do Not Track' Proposal
The World Wide Web Consortium has rejected a "Do Not Track" standard
proposed by the online advertising industry. The industry proposal
would have allowed advertising companies to continue to collect data on
consumer browsing activities, but would have limited the way in which
companies could characterize users based on that data. The working
group stated that the industry proposal was "less protective of privacy
and user choice than their earlier initiatives." Senator Jay
Rockefeller (D-WV), the Senate Commerce Committee Chair, has
re-introduced legislation to regulate the commercial surveillance of
consumers online. In 2010, EPIC recommended to Congress that an
effective Do Not Track initiative must ensure that a consumer's
decision is "enforceable, persistent, transparent, and simple."
W3C: Rejection of Industry 'Do Not Track' Proposal (Jul. 15, 2013)
http://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/2013-july-decision/
Sen Jay Rockefeller (D-WV): Revised Do Not Track Bill (Feb. 28, 2013)
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s913
EPIC: Statement to Congress on DNT Legislation (Dec. 2, 2010)
http://epic.org/redirect/072613-EPIC-Statement-DNT.html
EPIC: Online Tracking and Behavioral Profiling
http://epic.org/privacy/consumer/online_tracking_and_behavioral.html
Study Finds Flaws in Proposed Mobile Short-Form Notice
A study by researchers at Carnegie Mellon University has found that
consumers are confused by the mobile app short-form notice currently
proposed by participants of the NTIA, the US Department of Commerce's
privacy multistakeholder process. The draft notice contains a list of
data categories for which mobile apps must provide notice, but CMU
study surveyed 800 mobile users and found that "participants had low
agreement on how different data and entities should be categorized."
In 2012, EPIC recommended that the Federal Trade Commission focus on
substantive privacy protections instead of notice.
CMU CyLab: Study on Mobile App Notices (Jul. 17, 2013)
http://www.cylab.cmu.edu/files/pdfs/tech_reports/CMUCyLab13011.pdf
US Dept. of Commerce: Privacy Multistakeholder Process Schedule
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/category/privacy
EPIC: Comments to FTC on Mobile Apps and Privacy (Jul. 11, 2012)
http://epic.org/privacy/ftc/FTC-In-Short-Cmts-7-11-12-FINAL.pdf
EPIC: NTIA Privacy Multistakeholder Process
http://epic.org/apa/ntia/default.html
========================================================================
[7] EPIC in the News
========================================================================
"Are you being tracked while shopping? [Video]." CBS This Morning,
July 29, 2013.
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50151854n
"Opponents of NSA surveillance emboldened by close House vote." The
Hill, July 28, 2013.
http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/313853-nsa-foes-
emboldened-by-house-vote-#ixzz2aRaJ1kgU
"A Black Box for Car Crashes." The New York Times, July 21, 2013.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/22/business/black-boxes-in-cars-a-
question-of-privacy.html?_r=0
"N.J. Supreme Court: Police Need Warrant for Your Cellphone Data."
Mashable, July 20, 2013.
http://mashable.com/2013/07/19/new-jersey-court-warrant-cellphone-
data/
Opinion: "Surveillance court too secretive: Our view." USA Today,
July 18, 2013.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2013/07/18/foreign-
intelligence-surveillance-court-nsa-editorials-debates/2567127/
Marc Rotenberg: "Supreme Court must protect our privacy
from the government." CNN Opinion, July 17, 2013.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/17/opinion/rotenberg-spying-supreme-
court/index.html
"No Clear Direction on Cellphone Location Tracking." Roll Call,
July 17, 2013.
http://www.rollcall.com/news/no_clear_direction_on_cellphone_
location_tracking-226437-1.html
"Rap for rap chap in crap rap app flap: Jay-Z blasted by privacy bods."
The Register (UK), July 16, 2013.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/07/16/jay_z_magna_carter_album_
app_fury/
"Jay-Z App, Amazon Extension Slammed On Privacy." Information Week,
July 15, 2013.
http://www.informationweek.com/security/privacy/jay-z-app-amazon-
extension-slammed-on-pr/240158281
"The Petition for Immediate Supreme Court Review of a Foreign
Intelligence Surveillance Court Order Raises Thorny Procedural Issues."
Justia, July 15, 2013.
http://verdict.justia.com/2013/07/15/the-petition-for-immediate-
supreme-court-review-of-a-foreign-intelligence-surveillance-court-
order-raises-thorny-procedural-issues
"US Public Split Over NSA Surveillance." VOA News, July 11, 2013.
http://www.voanews.com/content/us-public-split-over-nsa-
surveillance/1700226.html
For More EPIC in the News: http://epic.org/news/epic_in_news.html
========================================================================
[8] EPIC Book Review: 'Spying on Democracy'
========================================================================
"Spying on Democracy: Government Surveillance, Corporate Power and
Public Resistance," Heidi Boghosian
http://epic.org/redirect/072613-spying-on-democracy-boghosian.html
Heidi Boghosian's "Spying on Democracy: Government Surveillance,
Corporate Power and Public Resistance" is a colorful, illustrative
primer on governmental and private-sector intelligence gathering.
Boghosian, Executive Director of the progressive National Lawyers'
Guild, draws on recent events and American "near-history" to
demonstrate such concepts as wiretapping, surveillance drone usage,
government-contracted corporate spying, and interagency fusion centers.
Each of the book's 13 chapters takes on a different method or
characteristic of data gathering, primarily centered around citizens
acting in their capacity as private individuals. Boghosian particularly
focuses on individual First Amendment rights, and the ways in which
public and private surveillance impact and infringe upon them. Thus,
a chapter on attorney-client privilege explores the ways that FBI and
NSA monitoring of public-interest law associations has impeded their
work, from the beginnings of the Cold War through the present day.
A later chapter covers another fundamental First Amendment right -
freedom of the press - and provides an overview of the US government's
history of domestic surveillance of journalists.
Boghosian also turns her unflinching analysis to corporate culture and
the ways in which private companies contribute to a surveillance
society. "Spying on Democracy"'s second chapter, for example, focuses
on migrant farm workers who pick the tomatoes used by Burger King,
McDonald's, and Taco Bell. When human-rights organizations began to
demonstrate on behalf of the underpaid and often mistreated migrant
workers, Boghosian writes, Burger King hired a private espionage firm
to infiltrate the organization: ". . . Florida's Fort Myers News-Press
[published] that the newspaper had identified emails originating from
Burger King's corporate headquarters in Miami as the source of
threatening messages sent to Immokalee Workers and the Student/
Farmworker's Alliance." This tactic of spying on critics in order to
undermine, intimidate, and discredit them is not unique to one or two
firms, Boghosian maintains; rather, it is a practice endemic to a
surveillance society.
"Spying on Democracy" also demonstrates how public and private
surveillance have merged, particularly over the past 10 to 20 years.
In a chapter about children's privacy, Boghosian describes PlayMobil's
"Security Checkpoint" play set, which helps "habituate [children] to
accept daily surveillance.". In another chapter, she discusses the
relationship between private surveillance firms and the federal
intelligence community, which often hire private contractors to conduct
their domestic spying, and how interdependent both sectors have become.
"Spying on Democracy" is an excellent collection of topics and
buzzwords; chapters are organized into tidy subsections, each of which
provides a brief but thorough description of a concept or incident. As
a result, the book reads like an encyclopedia with good narrative
structure, or a set of educational short stories. Boghosian's thesis,
while never explicitly laid out, permeates the entire text: that the
cooperation between private and public surveillance apparatus impedes
the rights of private citizens to speak, write, organize, assemble and
object. "Spying on Democracy" is not a scholarly read, but it is fast-
paced, active, and punctuated with photographs. And for the more
academically inclined, it is also replete with well-cited footnotes.
-- Julia Horwitz
================================
EPIC Publications:
"Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws 2010," edited by
Harry A. Hammitt, Marc Rotenberg, John A. Verdi, Ginger McCall, and Mark
S. Zaid (EPIC 2010). Price: $75.
http://epic.org/bookstore/foia2010/
Litigation Under the Federal Open Government Laws is the most
comprehensive, authoritative discussion of the federal open access laws.
This updated version includes new material regarding President Obama's
2009 memo on Open Government, Attorney General Holder's March 2009 memo
on FOIA Guidance, and the new executive order on declassification. The
standard reference work includes in-depth analysis of litigation under:
the Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, the Federal Advisory
Committee Act, and the Government in the Sunshine Act. The fully updated
2010 volume is the 25th edition of the manual that lawyers, journalists
and researchers have relied on for more than 25 years.
================================
"Information Privacy Law: Cases and Materials, Second Edition" Daniel J.
Solove, Marc Rotenberg, and Paul Schwartz. (Aspen 2005). Price: $98.
http://www.epic.org/redirect/aspen_ipl_casebook.html
This clear, comprehensive introduction to the field of information
privacy law allows instructors to enliven their teaching of fundamental
concepts by addressing both enduring and emerging controversies. The
Second Edition addresses numerous rapidly developing areas of privacy
law, including: identity theft, government data mining and electronic
surveillance law, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act,
intelligence sharing, RFID tags, GPS, spyware, web bugs, and more.
Information Privacy Law, Second Edition, builds a cohesive foundation
for an exciting course in this rapidly evolving area of law.
================================
"Privacy & Human Rights 2006: An International Survey of Privacy Laws
and Developments" (EPIC 2007). Price: $75.
http://www.epic.org/phr06/
This annual report by EPIC and Privacy International provides an
overview of key privacy topics and reviews the state of privacy in over
75 countries around the world. The report outlines legal protections,
new challenges, and important issues and events relating to privacy.
Privacy & Human Rights 2006 is the most comprehensive report on privacy
and data protection ever published.
================================
"The Public Voice WSIS Sourcebook: Perspectives on the World Summit on
the Information Society" (EPIC 2004). Price: $40.
http://www.epic.org/bookstore/pvsourcebook
This resource promotes a dialogue on the issues, the outcomes, and the
process of the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS). This
reference guide provides the official UN documents, regional and
issue-oriented perspectives, and recommendations and proposals for
future action, as well as a useful list of resources and contacts for
individuals and organizations that wish to become more involved in the
WSIS process.
================================
"The Privacy Law Sourcebook 2004: United States Law, International Law,
and Recent Developments," Marc Rotenberg, editor (EPIC 2005). Price:
$40.
http://www.epic.org/bookstore/pls2004/
The Privacy Law Sourcebook, which has been called the "Physician's Desk
Reference" of the privacy world, is the leading resource for students,
attorneys, researchers, and journalists interested in pursuing privacy
law in the United States and around the world. It includes the full
texts of major privacy laws and directives such as the Fair Credit
Reporting Act, the Privacy Act, and the OECD Privacy Guidelines, as well
as an up-to-date section on recent developments. New materials include
the APEC Privacy Framework, the Video Voyeurism Prevention Act, and the
CAN-SPAM Act.
================================
"Filters and Freedom 2.0: Free Speech Perspectives on Internet Content
Controls" (EPIC 2001). Price: $20.
http://www.epic.org/bookstore/filters2.0
A collection of essays, studies, and critiques of Internet content
filtering. These papers are instrumental in explaining why filtering
threatens free expression.
================================
EPIC publications and other books on privacy, open government, free
expression, and constitutional values can be ordered at:
EPIC Bookstore http://www.epic.org/bookstore
================================
EPIC also publishes EPIC FOIA Notes, which provides brief summaries of
interesting documents obtained from government agencies under the
Freedom of Information Act.
Subscribe to EPIC FOIA Notes at:
http://mailman.epic.org/mailman/listinfo/foia_notes
=======================================================================
[9] Upcoming Conferences and Events
=======================================================================
The Public Voice Conference, Warsaw, Poland, September 2013. For More
Information: http://thepublicvoice.org.
=======================================================================
Join EPIC on Facebook and Twitter
=======================================================================
Join the Electronic Privacy Information Center on Facebook and Twitter:
http://facebook.com/epicprivacyhttp://epic.org/facebookhttp://twitter.com/epicprivacy
Join us on Twitter for #privchat, Tuesdays, 11:00am ET.
Start a discussion on privacy. Let us know your thoughts. Stay up to
date with EPIC's events. Support EPIC.
=======================================================================
Privacy Policy
=======================================================================
The EPIC Alert mailing list is used only to mail the EPIC Alert and to
send notices about EPIC activities. We do not sell, rent or share our
mailing list. We also intend to challenge any subpoena or other legal
process seeking access to our mailing list. We do not enhance (link to
other databases) our mailing list or require your actual name.
In the event you wish to subscribe or unsubscribe your e-mail address
from this list, please follow the above instructions under "subscription
information."
=======================================================================
About EPIC
=======================================================================
The Electronic Privacy Information Center is a public interest research
center in Washington, DC. It was established in 1994 to focus public
attention on emerging privacy issues such as the Clipper Chip, the
Digital Telephony proposal, national ID cards, medical record privacy,
and the collection and sale of personal information. EPIC publishes the
EPIC Alert, pursues Freedom of Information Act litigation, and conducts
policy research. For more information, see http://www.epic.org or write
EPIC, 1718 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 200, Washington, DC 20009. +1 202
483 1140 (tel), +1 202 483 1248 (fax).
=======================================================================
Donate to EPIC
=======================================================================
If you'd like to support the work of the Electronic Privacy Information
Center, contributions are welcome and fully tax-deductible. Checks
should be made out to "EPIC" and sent to 1718 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite
200, Washington, DC 20009. Or you can contribute online at:
http://www.epic.org/donate
Your contributions will help support Freedom of Information Act and
First Amendment litigation, strong and effective advocacy for the right
of privacy and efforts to oppose government and private-sector
infringement on constitutional values.
Thank you for your support.
=======================================================================
Subscription Information
=======================================================================
Subscribe/unsubscribe via web interface:
http://mailman.epic.org/mailman/listinfo/epic_news
Back issues are available at: http://www.epic.org/alert
The EPIC Alert displays best in a fixed-width font, such as Courier.
------------------------- END EPIC Alert 20.15------------------------